Accepting a caution while training to be a nurse

[burntoutteacher]

This is a really brief synopsis, hope you guys can help.

My friend is training to be a nurse. Her mentally abusive ex has been harassing her via the authorities since they split. In 18 months he has taken her to court for access (but doesn't show up ), and reported her to SS and she had to be interviewed twice. He won't work officially but does have jobs on the quiet, doesn't pay towards the children either.

Foolishly, she approached him at his place of work 6 months ago and argued with him over money. He started pushing her out of the shop and she lashed out and hit him across the chest. He called the police and wants her prosecuted. She has begged him not to, given the effect it will have on her career and the children, but he just laughed.

Police want to caution her instead but my understanding is that it will remain on her file for 100 years and will be just as damaging for her career. She has to sign the caution tomorrow and is devastated.

Is there anything at all she can do? Police have apparently tried to reason with him but he said he feels victimised ( don't get me started on that) and so she is to be cautioned.

She feels the career she tried so hard for is about to be shattered and he will then find new ways of beating her down. Please help:/

Vicar, Spero, thanks a million.

Are the police obliged to tell her if it has passed the threshold test?

Her ex is chomping at the bit to her to court and would run there to give evidence.
A colleague of her ex wrote a witness statement, anything police wouldn't tell her what it said.
My friend actually hit him across the face ( not the chest, that was my error)

Is the threshold test only in relation to ex's willingness to go to court or is it based on anything else?
Vicar, in your honest opinion should she fight it? I hate to see this happening to her, it's desperate:/

She's not on legal aid

I have just looked at the CPS website - it looks very clear and well set out.

The threshold is clearly passed re available evidence, but the part about the public interest is worth a read - the prosecutor must take into account the seriousness of the offence, culpability of assailant, injuries to victim etc.

I assume this is the lowest level of criminal assault, no injuries to victim, arose out of circumstances of some provocation etc, etc.

I haven't done crime for ages so don't take this as gospel, but I can't see it a reasonable use of public funds to have a trial about this.

If she is paying privately and the solicitor doesn't want to fight, that doesn't look good at all.

Why's that Spero? Cos he thinks she will be convicted? Oh dear:/
It's based in Northern Ireland btw- not sure if its relevant.

The only evidence that would be shown in court is his statement, statements of other witnesses, her interview(s) and the CCTV. From what you have said, she looks like she turned up at his work, argued with him, he tried to eject her and she assaulted him.

There is no defence. Going to court may result in a caution anyway but could result in worse.

Although I have sympathy, she should have kept her hands to herself. Would she lash out at a patient that is giving her a hard time?

If this was a man doing this to a woman the tables would be well and truly turned. Not only men are aggressors.

She should accept the caution with good grace, declare it and hope that it doesn't affect her long term.

Law might be different in Northern Ireland, what I know just applies to England and Wales.

I am obviously not in a position to give any advice but looking at what we know, if she accepts a caution she is almost certainly screwed career wise. and if I were her I would refuse and hope that either the trial doesn't proceed or she can be found not guilty - but that is probably a vain hope of the CCTV shows her hitting him in the face.

But she absolutely must stay away from him in future, whatever happens. But I guess she knows that.

ok - threshold test.
explanation here

you need to ask - or her solicitor does.

the problem here is the CCTV - its damning evidence if it does indeed show her hitting him across the face. its irrefutable evidence.

Has her solictor seen the footage? make sure he has. What exactly does CCTV show? she needs to know this to the letter before mmaking any decisions at all.

a caution is often offered to people who have never come to police attention before, its often a way of binning something that needs on paper to be dealt with, i see it as a slap on the wrists - but in your friends case it could be just as detrimental because of her career choice. She really needs some sound legal advice.

Are there mitigating circumstances? has she got proof of these?
If her ex is willing to go to court and give evidence then she could be up shit creek....if he dropped it the CPS rarely run low level domestic violence cases (rightly or wrongly)

but - the cold hard facts are that she has committed an offence and by the sounds of it on CCTV to boot.....its not looking terribly good. im sorry. i hate things like this - its so hard to deal with - professionally we are meant to take a hard line on any DV.

things to get her solictor to ask.....

1. does it pass the threshold test.
2. what is the likely hood of a conviction based on the evidence?
3. have they SEEN WITH THEIR OWN EYES the CCTV footage? what exactly does it show?

only then can she make a decision on whether to accept a caution or not really....

I have very little sympathy for the Op's mate she made the decision to fo tearing into her ex's place of work wns and then assaulted him. This doesn't auger well for a career in nursing.

I wonder how much sympathy would be extended to a male trainee nurse who made the conscious decision to go their exes place of work and then preceded to deck them (regardless of the provocation)

The less chance of this woman working as a nurse the better.

oh and btw - im England not NI....not sure if the laws are different.

NHS worker here. We have just had to let a locum go, on their first day, as their CRB had caution for assault 10yrs ago. The circs sounded as if this person would pose no risk to patients, the trust don't want to take the risk.
She needs to know if she accepts the caution, she waves goodbye to her career anyway.

oh - and has she been interviewed re the assault? by what format? was is a contemp note interview?
or done on tape (or DVD now we are in the digital age....)

what did she say? has she admitted the assault? To get to the point of a caution then she must have been interviewed....that would be used in evidence against her in court aswell.....so its important to know what she said on interview.

Vicar, she said she cried all the way through the interview ( tape) but did admit it.
She said sorry a million times, had to stop the tape to throw up ( sorry ) , she also referred to times when she helped ex out in the past when he was down on his luck and although they've had bad fights, she didn't think it would come to this.

To the poster who isn't sorry for my friend. You don't need to be. I'm not asking you to be, not sure what your point is.

And vicar and Spero and everyone else, thanks so much for the replies.

well hpw suitable is someone who makes the decision to go there to someone's place of work - confront them and then assault them for a professional career as a nurse? hand on heart woyld you qant an elderly and vulnerable relative treated by someone wirh a case history of recent violence,?

I think the posters who are giving advice on how to avoid prosecution for an offence she committed need to have a long hard look at themselves.

Honestly, I think unless she is very lucky she needs to start considering a new career path.

A caution for assault would rule out the vast majority (if not all) of nursing jobs so I would be tempted to take my chances in court, but I would want to know what the maximum possible punishment the court could impose was first. If it was a fine/community service I would take the chance but if I was risking prison time I probably wouldn't. Your friend needs to decide what level of risk is acceptable to her.

For what it's worth I have family in the police service and they all say to refuse a caution if it is offered as it is unlikely it will be taken further. An assault which has been recorded on CCTV might be a different matter though if the ex is pushing for a conviction. Can she find out how likely it is they will prosecute before making her decision?

oh dear, i am loath to advise anything because your friend needs to consult her solicitor.

but.
its not looking great. she has admitted the offence on interview (it matters not that she cried, was sorry, or was ill)
there is CCTV footage (be sure to find out what exactly that shows)
and her ex is willing to go to court and give evidence and follow through with a complaint.

the evidence against her is pretty damning, im sorry. She is eligible for caution - because she has already admitted it, i assume has no previous offences and its a low level section 39 assault. But, she has assaulted him - the bare bones of the facts are there for a court to see.

i dont want to advise - she really needs advice from a solictor. She needs to talk to the uni now about what happens if she either accepts caution or gets a conviction.

i understand that sometimes in the heat of the moment people can do things that are out of character - thats life. But the courts are there to decide if a person is guilty or not - and she is. im sorry. i think its damage limitation now if im honest. She needs advice on which way to play this from her solicitor.

the police simply gather evidence to present to court - the magistrate decides the rest (this would only go to magistrates court).

she will not go to prison for a first offence of common assault btw....

you need to know -

1. if she refuses caution, will this go to court? yes or no. This is the biggie....if there is little chance of it going to court then that would dictate for me what to do next.
2. if it goes to court, her solicitor needs to tell her honestly what he thinks - he has seen the CCTV, read the statements, heard the interview.

i can only speculate.

Compos hat I have had a long hard look at myself. It is conceivable that this cld have been me, five years ago, when the separation from my ex was recent and extremely raw.

He followed me through me flat, wouldn't leave, I had to lock myself in the bathroom. I really wanted to hit him, I really wanted to hurt him at that moment. Add to that arguments about contact/money etc i can understand how things get out of control.

I think it is just nonsense to say o its all violence, its all equally awful. Therebisna world of difference between someone who acts out of character after provocation, who is immediately remorseful, who is shocked by what they did and someone who uses violence as a tool and out of relationships to control.

Of course I am not saying what she did was right or that i am right in assessing this as a oneoff for which she is extremely remorseful. she might be a nasty vicious cow and thisis what she deserves.

But say she isn't. So this is the end of her career? An end to most employment prospects for a very long time? How on earth does that punishment fit the crime?

I am very glad I didn't hit my ex and get cautioned. That would have been the end of my job. Looking back over the years it seems like a bad dream that I ever felt so awful. I have never come close to violence with anyone else.

I'm sorry, but you either have zero tolerance to domestic violence or you don't. As far as I am concerned, assaulting a current or ex partner whatever the perceived provocation is unacceptable and in all cases, the police should seek to press charges.

It shouldn't matter what gender the victim and offender are. Her career in Nursing should be over.

My gran has dementia, at times she can be rude, uncooperative and difficult with nursing staff.

Would I want someone with a recent conviction for assault responsible for her care? Absolutely not.

Do UK courts have the power to discharge without conviction, and if so, will that turn up on a CRB check?

Compos is derailing the thread pontificating about the morals of this case, so I won't enter into it. If only life was as black and white as that though!

Vicar, you've been brilliant, it's a depressing read but I'll have to show my friend what you think. I don't know how she will ever escape her ex, he baits her like this at every opportunity.

She will ring her sol first thing to see if he has seen the tape himself fully ( I know his colleague did and told her she had messed up', so that doesn't look good, does it?
Sol said he sees no point in representing her. Not sure what he thinks about it going to court, I assume he thinks it will based on that comment. She has had help from WA for financial and emotional abuse from him, not sure if that's relevant?

Her sol isn't interested in the case going any further.

Ok, so by zero tolerance to violence, you would reconvict those women whose convictions for murder/manslaughter were overturned because they had been battered?

You would lump this woman in with the same category of men who repeatedly and persistantly beat their partners to control them?

This 'zero tolerance' approach leads to enormous unfairness and rigidity of approach. It's just unreal. We are all capable of violence. His behaviour in waving money around in front of her and refusing to give her any was hugely provocative.

spero but the point is that you didn't go to your former partner's place of work and seek a confrontation with them and then assault them. I guess you had more control and common sense than that.

I agree that not all violence is equally as terrible, but in your heart of hearts, if the op's mate had been male and had gone to their ex-wife's work and then assaulted his ex-wife and then turned round and said 'it was a one off and I was provoked' but it is not fair my career working with vulnerable people should be compromised, how sympathetic would you be?

I would be utterly unsympathetic and think he should have had the book thrown at him and not be allowed to work in a position of trust such as nursing.

Who will tell her whether or not it will go to court? The police said if she doesn't sign by 3pm tomorrow she will be arrested, so I assume that means they will be taking it to court? Is that what you mean?x